var arr = [1, 2, 3]
var other = [arr, 4]
var arr = [1, 2, 3]
var other = arr.push(4)
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Spread | |
Push |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Spread | 28995808.0 Ops/sec |
Push | 48704432.0 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and understand what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark definition provides two JavaScript code snippets that test different approaches to concatenate an array with another value or values.
Test Cases:
"var arr = [1, 2, 3]\r\nvar other = [...arr, 4]"
)In this case, the ...
operator is used to create a new array by spreading the elements of arr
. This creates a new array with two elements: [1, 2, 3, 4]
.
The pros of using the spread operator are:
However, there might be a small performance overhead due to the creation of a new array.
Test Cases (continued):
"var arr = [1, 2, 3]\r\nvar other = arr.push(4)"
)In this case, push()
is called on the original array, which modifies the array in place and returns the updated length of the array.
The pros of using push()
are:
However, there might be some overhead due to the modification of the original array.
Library:
None of the test cases explicitly use any JavaScript libraries. The tests focus solely on the syntax and performance differences between using the spread operator and push()
.
Special JS feature or syntax:
The ...
spread operator is a relatively modern feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It's designed to create new arrays by spreading elements from existing arrays. This feature was not available prior to ES6, which might affect the performance and compatibility of these tests.
Other considerations:
When choosing between using the spread operator or push()
for array concatenation, consider the following:
push()
might be more efficient.Alternatives:
Some alternative approaches for array concatenation include:
slice()
and then pushing the desired values onto it.Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its own trade-offs in terms of performance, memory usage, and code readability.
I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested on MeasureThat.net!